Oklahoma Enacts Law Including Sex Offender Residency Restrictions

Communities across the country continue to debate the development and adoption of residency restrictions the prohibit convicted sex offenders from residing in close proximity to areas where children are known to congregate.These laws, whether adopted at the state or local levels, have been successfully challenged on both constitutional and preemption grounds.Despite this, local governments continue to enact these laws, absent specific state legislation, in result to public pressure.

In June, Oklahoma enacted amendments to state law prohibiting any person registered as a sex offender from residing either temporarily or permanently within a 2,000-foot radius of any public or private school site; educational institution; playground or park that is established, operated, or supported in whole or in part by city, county, state, federal or tribal government; or a licensed day care center.

To address the constitutional problems with the Georgia law, the Oklahoma statute provides that establishment of a day care center or park in the vicinity of the residence of a registered sex offender will not require the relocation of the sex offender or the sale of the property. This statute also does not require anyone to sell or otherwise dispose of any real estate or home acquired or owned prior to the conviction of the person as a sex offender.

Responses

Residency restrictions protect no one! It’s about time state legislators pay attention to what the EXPERTS are saying.
I wrote this article last week.
THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM ARE THE LAW MAKERS WHO PASS LAWS WITHOUT EXPERT ADVISE PDF Print E-mail
Written by Linda
Friday, 22 August 2008 17:21

It is my educated opinion and that of the experts that sex offender laws as they are written today,“Do More Harm than Good.” These laws actually endanger children and society.

Megans Law and the Residence restrictions do not protect the children as these regulations intended. They actually make matters worse by creating itinerant predators.

Let me explain,
Incest and friends of the family make up approximately 98% of all sex offenses. There has been estimated that 60 million individuals in this country that has experienced child sexual abuse. 50%, 30 million will go on to abuse a child. This is the crux of the problem, and we are NOT addressing it.

Instead, law makers are creating laws that Do More harm than good. For example,

The public registries. 98% of those come from the family and friends of the family. It is a fact that once caught that 95% of them NEVER EVER repeat another sex crime. And that without therapy.

The remaining 5% are HIDING in the registries. Those who DID NOT know their victims, the violent rapists and the repeat offender.

AND, approximately, 95% of all new sex offenses are committed by individuals NOT on the registries. Is it no wonder because law makers have totally ignored the fact that Incest and friends of the family are the crux of the problem. There are 30 million abusers out there and lawmakers have done NOTHING to address PREVENTION through EDUCATION.

By ignoring incest and friends of the family, law makers have created a GREATER RISK to children and society. If we do not openly discuss it, do not propose any educational models to better inform ourselves and keep ourselves afflicted with guilt and shame which washes over all concerned, perpetrators, victims, and other family members alike, we all help shield and perpetuate the crime.

These sex offender laws are being passed without advice of the EXPERTS. They are knee jerk regulatory reaction which is just another way of saying, additional punishment is justified. Congress and the house have ignored the experts in the field. But when it comes to light bulbs they clamor for expert testimony. There is something very fundamentally wrong with your approach.
The remainder of this article may be viewed herehttp://www.cfcoklahoma.org

Residency laws do not work nor does these laws. Prime example is my son rickys story and how at sixteen he became a predator for teen consensual sex. His therapist says he is NO THREAT to children yet the laws list him as high risk..politicians even told me “predators are hiding in the registry” yet nothing is being done to correct this or get teens off the registry for consensual matters in nature. http://www.rickyslife.com Do you ever ask why you do not see rickys story in the paper? Simple, the media doesn’t want to tell folks teh truth, like the government, they manipulate the minds of families/parents cause it seels more papers and continues the hysteria. All I ask people is you educate yourselves with facts, do you rown research and demand politicians fix the registry for its true purpose so your tax dollars can truly be used for those deemed most dangerous by experts not a lawmaker who simply wants your vote. Email me if you are willing to know facts and the truth as tragically, due to rickys young life being thrown away I have hadmy eyes opened. Share our story help me save someones child before they are destroye. Links to view http://www.derekoftexas.blogspot.com or http://www.ethicaltreatment.org or http://www.thesupporthotline.org or http://www.rightsandlaw.netd.

“It is sad 20th Century Commentary that society views the convicted felon as a social outcast. He has done wrong, so we rationalize and condone punishment in various forms. We express a desire for rehabilitation of the individual, while simultaneously we do everything to prevent it. Society cares little for the conditions which a prisoner must suffer while in prison, it cares even less for his future when he is released from prison. He is a marked man. We tell him to return to the norm of behavior, yet we brand him as virtually unemployable, he is required to live his normal activities severely restricted and we react with sickened wonder and disgust when he returns to a life of crime.”— Former Chief Circuit Judge Donald Lay
“You ban somebody from the community, he has no friends, he feels bad about himself, and you reinforce the very problems that contribute to sex abuse behavior in the first place. You make him a better sex offender.”— Robert Freeman-Longo, former director of the Safer Society

“Placing restrictions on the location of correctionally supervised sex offender residences may not deter the sex offender from re-offending and should not be considered as a method to control sexual offending recidivism.” — Colorado Department of Public Safety, Division of Criminal justice, Sex Offender Management Board, Report on Safety Issues Raised by Living Arrangements for and Location of Sex Offenders in the Community

“There is simply no evidence to suggest that residency restriction – will lead to decreases in recidivism. Rather, the evidence suggests mass migration to rural areas, decreasing their social stability and increasing their risk of recidivism [plus] a dramatic increase in offenders driven underground” — California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, 2006

“There is no evidence in Minnesota that residency proximity to schools or parks affects reoffense – Blanket proximity restrictions – do not enhance community safety.” — Minnesota Department of Corrections, ‘Level Three Sex Offenders Residential Placement Issues’ 2003 Report to the MN Legislature

“We’re not aware of any evidence that residency restrictions have prevented a child from being victimized.” — Carolyn Atwell-Davis, Director of Legislative Affairs, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

“There were about five weeks of testimony presented by knowledgeable Iowa people who work with sex offender issues… There was not one, not one shred of evidence presented that the residency law provides safety for children. In fact, there was a significant amount of evidence presented that the law might actually decrease child safety. Even the clear evidence that enforcement of the law is wasting valuable law enforcement resources…” — Corwin R. Ritchie, Iowa County Attorneys Association executive director

“The current law applies to too many offenders and I spend ‘way, way too much of my time’ trying to enforce it, I believe less than 10% of the state’s 8,000 convicted sex offenders to be high-risk and is lobbying lawmakers to focus on them” — Sgt. Gary Stansill, Tulsa Police Department, Sex-crimes Unit

“Though laudable in their intent, there is little evidence that recently enacted housing policies achieve their stated goals of reducing recidivistic sexual violence. In fact, there is little research at all evaluating the effectiveness of these policies. Furthermore, these policies are not evidence-based in their development or implementation, as they tend to capture the widely heterogeneous group of sex offenders rather than utilize risk assessment technology to identify those who pose a high danger to public safety.” — Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Human Services, Lynn University

“Housing restrictions have passed in most localities with little resistance. Child safety is rightly the primary concern when sex offender restrictions are imposed. It seems to make sense that decreasing access to potential victims would be a feasible strategy to preventing sex crimes. There is no evidence, however, that such laws are effective in reducing recidivistic sexual violence. On the other hand, such laws aggravate the scarcity of housing options for sex offenders, forcing them out of metropolitan areas and farther away from the social support, employment opportunities and social services that are known to aid offenders in successful community re-entry.” — Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Human Services, Lynn University, ‘Sex offender residence restrictions. A Report to the Florida Legislature,’ October 2005

“If the 2,000-foot rule had been in effect 10 years ago, I can’t think of a single case from our files that would have been any different.” — Sgt. Bryce Smith, Sex Offender Registry Officer, Scott County, Iowa

“Therapy works for these people. Let them be punished for their crimes, let them out and let them get on with their lives. Let them work. Let them have stable homes and families and let them live in peace. Harassing them, making them move and continually punishing them does far more harm than good. A sex offender in therapy with a job and a place to live is less of a threat than one that is constantly harassed.” — Robert Shilling, Detective, Seattle, WA Crimes Against Children Division

Reports on the rearrest, reconviction, and reincarceration of former inmates who were tracked for 3 years after their release from prisons in 15 States in 1994. The former inmates represent two-thirds of all prisoners released in the United

States that year. The report includes prisoner demographic characteristics (gender, race, Hispanic origin, and age), criminal record, types of offenses for which they were imprisoned, the effects of length of stay in prison on likelihood of rearrest, and comparisons with a study of prisoners released in 1983.

* Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).
* Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide.
* The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.http://www.cfcoklahoma.org

Who commits most sex crimes? Well, 95% of all new sex crimes are committed by those NOT on the registry. Family members and those known to the family commit 98% of all sex crimes. So much for stranger danger.
2nd question. Who is MORE LIKELY to committ a sex crime upon release from prison? Sex Offenders or NON-sex offenders?

For the answer, go here. http://www.cfcoklahoma.org and see the article, “Revisiting Department of Justice Recidivism Statistics and More Shocking Truths.”

Our nation and the states is in a financial crisis that could lead to bankruptcy. The Federal government is about to sell our homes to foreign countries

We need a serious “open debate” in the House of Representatives on this subject. In the long run it will cost Oklahoma tax payers millions in new taxes for a law that protects no one but endangers everyone. Also, the predators are hiding in the registries. 78% in Tier III which should only reflect Oklahoma’s recidivism rate.

Please read the article “Federal Domestic Spending Bill Cuts Crime Funding Program by 67 Percent,” at the web site below.http://www.cfcoklahoma.org

Virginia determined that the first year of compliance with the registry aspect of SORNA would cost more than $12
million.3
• The first year of implementing SORNA would cost the Commonwealth of Virginia $12,497,000.
• The yearly annual cost of SORNA would be $8,887,000. Adjusted with a 3.5 percent yearly inflation rate,4 Virginia
would be paying more than $10 million by 2014.
• If Virginia chose to comply with SORNA, the state would spend $12,097,000 more than it would if it chose not to
implement SORNA and forfeit 10 percent of its yearly Byrne grant, a loss totaling approximately $400,000

Randy Lopp, treatment subcommittee chairman of the Oklahoma Sex Offender Management Team says it best, “Most people who know anything about this are frustrated. It is just not helpful — the laws as they are now,”

”I think if the general public understood the research, they would be willing to back the legislators to change the laws to make more sense and to protect children, because the laws as they are written are not protecting children,” he said. “They are doing more harm than good.”

—
Once truth is acknowledged, you cannot deny it and remain true to yourself

I was a victim of sexual abuse. It occurred within the family like 98% of other sexually abusive incidents. The community wants to control where sex offender live, know where they are, and keep them away from their children when the very people who are doing the sex offending are the family members. My husband is a sex offender, Level III. He was 16 when he plead without sufficient counsel to rape. A woman the age of 19 claimed she raped him. She was a stranger to my husband. The first time he ever met her was in Court. It never happened but because he didn’t have an attorney and was imprisoned for 2 years for the Court proceeding, his attorney told him to accept the plea and only do 18 more months. He was told if he went to trial the jury would believe her testimony and he could get 15 years or longer. He took the plea, ended up serving 8 years and now must register for life. No one will hire him, we fear to buy a home in any community, and we fear sending our son to a school where parents would ignorantly allow their children to isolate him for something his father was convicted of over 13 years ago. You think that preventing him from living near your children is going to keep them safe when it’s statistically proven that most sexual offenses will happen by someone you know and someone who is a family member or a friend of the family. They served there time, allow them to live a stable life. There are only a rare number of cases where strangers, who are registered sex offender, commit sexual crimes on any child. Don’t be ignorant. Look at the facts, don’t sleep better at night because laws are restricting others rights when you should know that is all they are doing. They are not protecting your children.

States will spend millions for passing the AWA which is “doing more harm than good.”

Legislators need to consult the EXPERTS rather than pass knee jerk legislation that actually endangers children and the whole of society. I encourage everyone to write their law makers demanding they stop endangering children with knee jerk legislation and BRING IN THE EXPERTS.

“Maine is one of the few states that is going about this correctly. They are “LISTENING TO EXPERTS, rather than passing emotional knee jerk legislation which protects no one but endangers everyone. The vast majority of states have passed laws that “Do more harm than good.”

Disclaimer

This blog is provided for general informational purposes only. It should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel. Persons requiring legal advice should retain a properly licensed lawyer. No attorney-client relationship will be formed based on use of this site and any comments or posts to this blog will not be privileged or confidential.